Sometimes you have to wonder which are the biggest fraud: Germany’s claim that its cars are clean, or its claim of being a leader in climate protection. Both, it turns out, are very fake and even downright frauds.

While German Chancellor Angela Merkel and German activists like going around and scolding Donald Trump for his “irresponsible” stance on “greenhouse” gas emissions, it is coming to light that Germany’s climate posturing is indeed a total swindle.

While USA’s greenhouse gas emissions have declined impressively over the past decade, Germany’s have gone nowhere.

Flat for 9 years

And now Cleanenergywire.org here reports that Germany again this year (2017) will again fail to reduce its CO2 equivalent emissions for the 9th year running. Ironically one of the reasons cited for this year by Cleanenergy.org is “cold weather” (again).

Germany’s CO2 equivalent CO2 greenhouse gas emissions in metric tonnes since 2009. This year (2017) CO2 equivalent emissions are expected to be slightly over those seen in 2016. Data taken from German Ministry for environment.

The reality is that Trump and America has nothing to learn from the Green-preaching Germans, except on how to deceive and mislead the public. Cleanenergy.org writes that the higher energy demand is “triggered by economic growth and colder weather“.

Cleanenergy.org cites the AG Energiebilanzen (AGEB), which said in a press release: “From January until September, energy demand was 1.9 percent higher than in the same period last year.” And thus the AG Energiebilanzen expects “energy-related CO2 emissions will rise slightly in 2017”.

“A disaster”

Merkel’s glaring failure, however, did not prevent her from taking a swipe at Trump, the Handelsblatt reports. Unfortunately for Merkel there is no disguising Germany’s failure to meet its own imposed targets. The Environment Ministry says the 2017 emissions figures are “a disaster for Germany’s international reputation as a climate leader.”

CO2 emissions reduction is pie-in the sky, another hoax

Whatever gets decided in Bonn will be pure meaningless self-deception. The fact remains that China, India and the rest of the developing world are going to continue boosting their fossil fuel energy consumption and CO2 emissions are going to keep rising for quite awhile. The recent OPEC report makes that very clear.

Some advice for Merkel: Forget the CO2 reductions. Cutting Germany’s puny 2% global share would theoretically lead to a temperature reduction of 1 or 2 hundredths of a degree Celsius, meaning some 100 trillion euros per °C. It’s pure economic insanity. Take the idea and discard it quickly into the dustbin for good.

The US is one of the only countries in the world to successfully reduce their CO2 emissions. Macron and Merkel prove that politicians don’t care about results or facts, but only about appearances and propaganda. The US has reduced emissions through increased reliance on natural gas, not wind and solar.

Ever increasing levels of wind and solar causes electricity costs to rise. If industry is carrying its fair share of those costs then electricity intensive industries have to fail. That is an effective means of reducing CO2 output. That is certainly what has happened in South Australia.

It appears that Germany has managed to stall the heavy industry failure but with companies like Siemens shedding staff, Germany should soon get back on track to reduce CO2 output.

The only possible way to lower CO2 output for any particular country is to have the wind and solar components imported from other countries because buffered wind and solar generation uses more electricity in its manufacture than it can produce over its life. So no economy can have a sustainable industry based on wind and solar generation.

The Siemens layoff is tiny, ca. 2% of their workforce. These changes happen all the time in large companies. But I wonder how Germany manages to shield its industry from the high energy prices which the ordinary people must pay. Is the EU still accepting this subsidy, which it in reality is?

From your link to the U. S., there appears to be tracking of “heating degree days” by CO2. Note the last 3 years of data.

For a country the size of the U. S. with an intensive built infrastructure, changing how structures are heated is a slow process.
For example: The local university has a central heating plant that produces hot water that is fed into pipes and goes into radiators in buildings. An old building, without duct work, is not a good candidate for a ground based electric powered heat pump. New buildings can be designed for more efficient heating.
The power plant could be converted to electric heating but this just moves the source of the emissions. It also leaves the pipes and radiators in place that need service and repair.
If a 30 to 40 year improvement plan is not fast enough, then a lot of money is needed forthwith for thousands of buildings.
Meanwhile, good weather is important.

Here is a link to some info on better heating and cooling systems:Link

I think she has, long ago, but as a politician she can’t say this. In politics, illusions and myths are more important than facts and figures, except the election figures.

It is clear she does not fear any global climate disaster. If she had, she would have very quickly ended the Energiewende, fired up all the nuclear power she could and built many more plants. That would reduce co2 emissions from Germany. 25000 “emissaries” in Bonn don’t cut emissions, quite the contrary.

[…] The truth is that the lion’s share of the country’s greenhouse gas reductions happened right after 1990 when free market principles were implemented to revamp totally run-down Communist East Germany. Yet since the mass state intervention that is the Energiewende, Germany’s reductions have ground to a halt. In reality the country — under Merkel’s leadership — has not seen its emissions of greenhouse gases fall since the end of the last decade, 2009! Read here. […]